spotify_get_track_duration_formatted

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, and the description fails to disclose behavioral traits such as behavior when no track is playing, error conditions, or authentication requirements. The description only states it returns formatted text.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, focused sentence that front-loads the key action and output format, with no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality and use case, but omits details about handling missing current track or potential errors.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage (no properties), the description adds no parameter info, but this is acceptable as baseline for zero-param tools. Score 4 reflects no loss and no additional value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly specifies it gets the total duration of the current track in formatted time (M:SS or H:MM:SS), distinguishing it from siblings like spotify_get_track_duration_ms (ms) and spotify_get_track_progress_formatted (progress).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies use when a human-readable total duration is needed (e.g., HUD displays) and emphasizes 'ONLY', but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, which is partially mitigated by sibling names.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.